Arnold's profileArnie Sherr, President ...PhotosBlogListsMore  |  Tools Help |
Arnie Sherr, President of Sherr Enterprises' "Written Words"Measuring the validity of "Insight:" Scroll downward to view all writings; AN AMERICAN LEADER and My TOUGH LOVE Immigration Plan and 25 more. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Public folders
April 19 “Brigadier General Benjamin O. Davis, Jr. was to the Army as Barack Hussein Obama is to America” by Arnie Sherr“Brigadier General Benjamin O. Davis, Jr. was to the Army as Barack Hussein Obama is to America” By Arnie Sherr April 19, 2009
I was born on February 2, 1943. I tell you my birth date simply to explain how I came about writing this piece. It is because a good friend came across a copy of “PIC” Magazine that was published on my birthday. Being the good friend he is, he purchased it and sent it to me knowing I would be excited to examine its content. And so I am!
Within this issue of “PIC” Magazine is an article that speaks of two African American military men who achieved the rank of General, Brigadier General Benjamin O. Davis, Jr. (1877 – 1970) being the first and his son, Brigadier General Benjamin Oliver Davis, Sr. (1908 - 2002) the second. An incredible accomplishment it was, especially in those days.
In this article Colonel Charles Young was quoted to have made the following statement: “If I wanted complete revenge on a super-enemy I wouldn’t send him to hell. I would make him a negro officer in a white army.”
After reading this piece I began to process the irony of his bold assertion. And, I’ll tell you why I am so troubled by the comparison I am about to express.
When President Obama was sworn in last January 20, 2009 the world rejoiced. Finally a black man has bridged the greatest of all prejudice breakthroughs. He has become the first African American President of the United States of America. And, his win was decisive beyond expectations. Suddenly the free world was pining to meet and have this unique American stand before them with messages of hope and change and to be enthralled by his profound ability to energize those whose ears are privy to his charm and elegance. I can’t remember another such candidate whose similarities culminated in a Presidential win since President John F Kennedy in 1961.
It has been 88 days to this writing, April 19, 2009; I am amazed at how the landscape has deteriorated. As it does, I am reminded of Colonel Charles Young’s quote above and I say with heartfelt regret, “Mr. President, the honeymoon is over, if ever it had started to begin with.”
Moreover and in spite of the fact that everything he has done since his inauguration is as promised, he is being chastised, picked apart, criticized, and dissected as if a frog in an 11th grade biology lesson. Be assured, this President unlike most others does not taste like chicken. He is unique, creative, innovative, dedicated, committed, passionate, focused, vigorous, and more. If I were an employer looking for employees; are these not the qualities I should seek? And, were I to hire such a person, would I attempt sabotaging the very promises made at the interview? You tell me?
I am beginning to envision our new President as “a negro officer in a white army.”
Agreeably, some of the concerns expressed by members of congress and the senate bear some credibility as do some expressed by both the right and left media. But, what this president is receiving is a barrage as if fired from a Gatling gun at close range. It seems only other leaders and pundits around the world are clapping gratefully for his intent and efforts.
In my lifetime, I’ve not witnessed such a preponderance of misrepresentations, twisting, and propaganda as I’m hearing from every direction. It is way too much to be considered rational response. As one so-called political expert expressed on Wolfe Blitzer’s “The Situation Room,” much of the Obamattacks are racially motivated. And, I agree.
The republicans led, symbolically, by Rush Limbaugh are so desperate to rescue their filled-with-holes brand; they stop at nothing to say “no.” It is against the law of averages that 100 percent of any large group is a consistent result. Moreover, I believe racial prejudice is alive and well in America. Not of a populous majority, but of a majority of those of both political and media influence. Strong and powerful voices seem to speak for more than is really represented. The illusion is much bigger than the reality!
Last weeks tea party (demonstrations) turnouts, experts suggest, were inflated by Fox News in support of their right wing agenda. I tend to believe these suggestions, but doing so only tells of my political loyalty. Most of the right believes otherwise, I am sure. Those in the middle probably laugh at both sides. Putting attendance aside, all one must to do is pay attention to many of the hate Obama signs openly displayed by many of the so-called “tea baggers.”
I am dismayed and disheartened to suddenly realize how naïve I’ve been to permit me to be gobbled up in the “how far we’ve come along prejudicial lines” after election rhetoric. Barack Obama is doing nothing more than everything he promised during his campaign while the GOP minority and the voices of the right side media, and I’m sorry to include CNN, continually reload and furiously crank the firing arm of the Gatling gun.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, President Obama has assembled an elite group of economists who inhabit the top of their expert rankings. It is this group that has put forth the plans to rescue Main Street from its torturous journey whilst the wealthy complain arrogantly about sacrificing for the benefit of those, Main Street consumers, who are predominately responsible for the wealth and success they enjoy to begin with. Against these economic experts is the bias opinions, mostly no’s, of lawyers and a few other professions seating both the Congress and Senate which are also, not in any way related to economics. Yet they wish is to believe they speak for Main Street. Well, they haven’t fooled me, and I hope not you either.
In an article “American racial prejudice and impact on election” the writer, Marisa Treviño of the Latina Lista begins with: “As much as some of us would like to think that this election is all about the issues, there’s no denying that a major issue for a lot of voters boils down to black versus white.
In fact, the issue has become such a hot topic that there are reports that at the London and South African book fairs, a new e-book titled “America the Racist?” gained some unprecedented interest. It seems the rest of the world wants to know as much as Americans if we can shed our prejudices and actually vote for a person of color.
Unfortunately, that will be a question that will continue to haunt the world until the polls close in November.”
I too, after Obama’s impressive November 11, 2008 win believed that we as a nation have stepped way beyond prejudice expectations, national and global. Recent happenings are definitely making me take another look-see.
Barack Obama pledged to change Washington. Of this promise I am much less optimistic. There are times while writing editorials like this I come up with suggestions that just might impact solutions or positive outcomes. Of this I’ve only one. In the next congressional and senatorial elections, elect only new-comers. Let’s bring new blood, new enthusiasm, and un-special-interest-tainted senators and representatives to the floors of both houses. And while we’re at it, let’s demand two term limits.
It’s time we make a LOUD and CLEAR statement, not soon to be forgotten! Are you with me?
March 24 "Equal" Are we really? by Arnie Sherr“Equal” Are we really? Something to mull over by Arnie Sherr
There have been 27 amendments to the Constitution; they are known as the “Bill of Rights.” The one I am centered on is Amendment I, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It is amazingly vague by today’s standards. Certain human differences were not only unspoken of at the time of this historical writing; many believed such differences did not exist. Amendment I, deals exclusively with obvious difference; religion and the free expression of, freedom of speech and of the press, the right to peaceable assembly and to petition government for a redress of grievances. Where is mention of physical difference (height, weight, appearance, and state of health – both physical and mental)? Where is mention of the difference of sexual preference and/or orientation? Regardless of the ‘choice to be’ or ‘of genetic origin’ all Americans are to be “equal” under the law. We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Whether straight, gay or lesbian; we are all People of the United States. As Americans there shall be no distinctive difference, physical, mental, or otherwise where such difference, obvious or not, does not infringe upon the rights and freedoms of other Americans. There are those who perceive the gay and lesbian communities and promiscuous and sexually irresponsible. Let’s be clear; I’ve been single since my last marriage for more than 30 years and exclusive of straights that stray promiscuously from their marriages, I’ve known many who, even single, have insatiable sexual appetites. Sexual promiscuity is not owned by the gay and lesbian world. It is, to my chagrin a universal reality. Having said that, it is my belief the greater majority of America’s populous live morally and responsibly whatever their orientation. Whether this writer is yea or nay about homosexuality, my point is that as much as those straight are permitted open expression of sexual preference and orientation, so shall those who subscribe openly or privately to a different agenda be respected of the same rights. “That all men (the word “men” used as a polysemy meaning “women”, as well) are created equal…” I fully understand, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written in a different time. After its origination, twenty seven amendments were made part of this Constitutional wonder. In that same light I suggest Amendment I be further updated to reflect current social characteristics neither recognized nor spoken of when these historic documents were created on September 17, 1787 and duly ratified June 21, 1788. Twenty seven amendments, spanning from 1772 until the last in 1992, have touched many issues the absence of which is the right of sexual preference and the legal expression thereof. It is time to enhance American standards of human rights by adding the “Freedom of Sexual Preference and Legal Expression” to the First Amendment. Whether it is believed sexual preference is a choice or otherwise, it still remains a significant and growing segment of the populous. “Like all parts of the American populous, freedoms are for all.” ◄► Of another related issue; who owns the rights to the English language? Whose right is it to reserve for itself, individually or collectively, the use of any word or phrase, or to the application or modification of its definition? Freedom permits individual interpretation, but not the ownership and/or modification of its use, application, or definition.
History of the English Language A short history of the origins and development of English The history of the English language really started with the arrival of three Germanic tribes who invaded Britain during the 5th century AD. These tribes, the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes, crossed the North Sea from what today is Denmark and northern Germany. At that time the inhabitants of Britain spoke a Celtic language. But most of the Celtic speakers were pushed west and north by the invaders - mainly into what is now Wales, Scotland and Ireland. The Angles came from England and their language was called Englisc - from which the words England and English are derived.
There is a power struggle over who has the ultimate right of ownership of the “word” marriage. There is a saying of which I often refer to make a point; “A carpenter who blames his tools for his poor workmanship is a poor carpenter – but a carpenter nevertheless!”
Perhaps permission from the Celtics should be acquired by those whose perceived arrogance gives them the right of ownership of the word “marriage.” And I doubt, even Celtics feel they own the English language. Has not a man who has illegitimately impregnated a woman the right to be known as Dad? Even the Courts that prosecute “deadbeat dads” recognize them as “dads.” Simply because they do not meet expected and acceptable dad definitions, legal and moral responsibilities do we insist they be called of another label? A-Holes, one suggested they may be called; we haven’t taken as yet to calling them “deadbeat A-Holes.” (Not in the Judicial sense, anyway)
Straights have no legal or moral claim to the word “marriage,” nor have they the right to adjust its definition to their prejudicial points of view or preference. Doing so is just another expression of prejudice, plain and simple. It’s our “word” and you can’t use it!
As a straight male, I’ve been married three times; I hold no affection or reverence for the word “marriage.” If the “word” had any real substance or influence its license would cost $50,000 and the divorce, a mere $10 bucks!
To the straights; listen well. The word “marriage” guarantees not happiness nor despair; yet many so-called “marriages” are filled with both, individually or a combination thereof. You wish ownership because you define its meaning to be between a man and a woman? How many “men” and “women” disgrace its very essence; or at least what it’s assumed owner-wannabees desire it to signify.
The English language is “public domain.” No has any more or less right to its legal use than another. No one has the right to modify, change, or otherwise reassign its connotation or perception for personal criteria.
“You can paint your house; you can’t paint your neighbors simply because theirs differs in color. It is still a house nevertheless”!
March 23 It is said AIG, the Big Three, and others are too big to fail by Arnie Sherr- It is said AIG, the Big Three, and others are too big to fail - “Perhaps it is the American people who are too big to fail” An analysis by Arnie Sherr
Who is really too big to fail? Here are some astounding facts…
TIME Partners with CNN by Bill Saporito Thursday, Mar. 19, 2009
“How AIG became too big to fail” [1]
AIG seems an unlikely candidate for the company that could bankrupt the planet. Founded 90 years ago in Shanghai, AIG moved its headquarters to New York City as the world headed toward war in 1939. After Maurice R. (Hank) Greenberg took over in 1967, AIG consolidated its global empire. By the time Greenberg was forced out in an accounting scandal 38 years later, AIG had become one of the world's biggest public companies, with sales of $113 billion in 2006 and 116,000 employees in 130 countries, from France to China.
AIG says it has written more than 81 million life-insurance policies, with a face value of $1.9 trillion. It covers roughly 180,000 small businesses and other corporate entities, which employ approximately 106 million people. That makes AIG America's largest life and health insurer; second largest in property and casualty. Through its aircraft-leasing subsidiary, AIG owns more than 950 airline jets. Just for good measure, AIG is a huge provider of insurance to U.S. municipalities, pension funds and other public and private bodies through guaranteed investment contracts and other products that protect participants in 401(k) plans. "We have no choice but to stabilize [it] or else risk enormous impact, not just in the financial system but on the whole U.S. economy," said Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
The risk is not in any one business but in the connections among them and in the industries in which they compete. As AIG has pointed out in its own analysis, "The extent and interconnectedness of AIG's business is far-reaching and encompasses customers across the globe ranging from governmental agencies, corporations and consumers to counter parties. A failure of AIG could create a chain reaction of enormous proportion." Among other effects, it could lead to mass redemptions of insurance policies, which would theoretically destabilize the industry; the withdrawal of $12 billion to $15 billion in U.S. consumer lending in a credit-short universe; and even damage airframe maker Boeing and jet-engine maker GE, since AIG's aircraft-leasing unit buys more jets than anyone else.
While AIG's holdings are diverse, nearly all its losses centered on AIG FP, which until March 2008 was led by its high-rolling president, Joseph Cassano, a tough-talking Brooklyn, N.Y., native who in the past eight years banked $280 million in cash compensation, or exactly $115 million more than the bonuses at the center of the current controversy. Cassano, who helped found the AIG FP unit in 1987, built his money machine not on anything fraudulent but on what's been described as regulatory arbitrage. As Bernanke explained recently, "AIG exploited a huge gap in the regulatory system. There was no oversight of the Financial Products division. This was a hedge fund, basically, that was attached to a large and stable insurance company."
Arnie Sherr writes: Sounds immense; doesn’t it?
By comparison, 140 million Americans are working during good economic times (about 104 million in 2009). It is calculated the average U.S. family median income is $48,204 annually [2]. That relates to 116 million American families whose earnings being pumped into the American economy is approximately $5.6 trillion annually or over a two year period, $11.2 trillion
The total revenue from sales for AIG [3] (2006 and 07) equals a mere $234,555 million; whereas, America’s workforce over the same two years earned approximately $10.3 trillion.[4]
Adding GM, Ford, and an estimated 100 billion for each of the years 2007 & 2008 for Chrysler’s revenue from sales ($589.7 billion) to AIG’s revenue from sales ($234.555 million) and still over the same two years America’s workforce out-performed all. ←Source [5]
AIG and the Big Three - $589.7 billion (2007 – 2008) vs. America’s workforce - $ 11.2 trillion (2007 – 2008); throw in the banks to:
“It is the American people who are too big to fail.”
Sources: [4] Wikipedia [5] ProCon.org
March 16 “A Typical Political Stall” by Arnie Sherr“A Typical Political Stall” By Arnie Sherr
It is possible from all of the political writing I post almost daily that from time-to-time I am inclined to take up a cause? Well, this one is about employer forced noncompete agreements. These are tough enough times during which to find jobs; being restricted by a noncompete agreement seems almost immoral. Feeling this way, I wrote to Senator Bill Nelson, the Democratic Senator from my state of Florida. Below is his response. Of course, I am not surprised by his attempt to placate my request with the usual (expletive deleted) response. Below his text I printed my response and faxed it to both his Washington DC and Tampa Florida offices. I am publishing this to blogs because more than just I should know of this common attempt to con one constituent. This “political stall” is “typical” among politicians.
Was and is it not the Dems that are promising transparency? I guess the word hasn’t gotten around to Bill Nelson. Oh don’t worry; the local republican senator, Gus Bilirakis, is just as adept; his responses born of the same “Stalling Constituents for DUMMIES” manual.
I’ll give ten to one yours do the same kinds of things. This is a prime example of why we should get rid of our respective state’s career politicians. It seems they’ve all forgotten who their bosses are, and who collectively keep them in their cushy career politician jobs. What were and are we thinking?
UNITED STATES SENATE
WASHINGTON DC 20510-0905 March 2, 2009 BILL NELSON FLORIDA Mr. Arnold Sherr 2463 Gulf to Bay Boulevard, #218 Clearwater, Florida 33765 Dear Mr. Sherr: Thank you for contacting me regarding non-compete clauses in contracts. I appreciate your taking the time to be involved and informed about matters important to Florida and our nation. Please know that 1 will keep your views in mind if this issue is considered before the Senate. If you have any other concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future. Sincerely, Signed Bill Nelson (D-FL)
P.S. From time to time, I compile electronic news briefs highlighting key issues and hot topics of particular importance to Floridians. If you'd like to receive these e-briefs, visit my Web site and sign up for them at http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/ebriefs.cfm Senator Nelson: I can understand this kind of political put-off from Senators and Congresspersons from other states, but not from a senator in my state and one for whom I voted. I am always thanked for being involved and told my suggestions will be considered if and when the issue arises in the house or senate. This is an important and extremely valid immediate concern. Under these trying circumstances I ask, "Why can't you bring this up in the Senate"? Why must it wait until someone else raises the issue?
For those reading this that are not familiar with noncompete agreements, I will attempt a brief explanation. What is a “Noncompete Agreement”? Noncompete agreements protect employers from losing valuable trade secrets and employees.
After losing scores of valuable employees (and trade secrets) to competitors, a growing number of employers are asking, or requiring, employees to sign noncompete agreements. By signing a noncompete agreement, an employee promises not to work for a direct competitor for a specified period of time after he leaves the company.
The premise is, when an employee with access to trade secrets leaves -- either because the employee quit or has been fired -- he could take this information and use it to his personal advantage (and at your expense). For example, a former employee may open a competing business or may go to work for a competitor and unwittingly or deliberately divulge your hard-won keys to success. A properly drafted noncompete agreement can keep this from happening. What is a "Trade secret”?In most states, a trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, physical device, idea, process or compilation of information that both:
Some examples of potential trade secrets are:
Unlike other forms of intellectual property such as patents, copyrights and trademarks, trade secrecy is basically a do-it-yourself form of protection. You don't register with the government to secure your trade secret; you simply keep the information confidential. Trade secret protection lasts for as long as the secret is kept confidential. Once a trade secret is made available to the public, trade secret protection ends.
In normal times, noncompete agreements have a legitimate place. However, its application has extended into areas where trade secrets are not the criteria and where there is no legal justification. Such areas are when made a requirement of those who sell a company’s products and services. Many times, even general staff are required to sign such agreements. Realistically, where its use is frivolous is when employers after having employees who are unexposed to “trade secret’s believe the simple threat of law suits is enough to fearfully control all who either quit or were terminated after being required to sign a noncompete. Many employees, not understanding noncompete parameters stress to find employment in areas in which they may not be qualified. Noncompete agreements prevent every-day people from seeking employment in the fields in which they have become experienced and knowledgeable; those fields in which they best qualify for the highest levels of compensation.
My request of Senator Bill Nelson is that he introduce an amendment that renders noncompete agreement unenforceable, at least until present economic woes have regained normal employment statistics. Furthermore, introducing better oversight and more stringent guidelines as to where noncompete agreements can and cannot be imposed will stop its obvious abuse to purpose. Most of us know someone, somewhere who is struggling partly because they are restricted by a present or previous employers’ noncompete agreement. Given today’s circumstances I urge as many as possible to write their respective state’s elected officials and request that such restrictions be lifted, at least for now!
Ask yourself, why are noncompete agreements necessary? Think carefully; I did! If employers would make it their business to treat employees humanly and respectfully; compensating them according to their intrinsic and proven value then perhaps there’d be no reason for seeking to move up the income chain by wooing competitors for more money, better benefits, etc. It is on record that over the past twenty years as the price of goods and services has increased, salaries have remained relatively stagnant. Logic tells me, if employees are valued and paid well there is be no reason to fear they would sacrifice “trade secrets” to achieve greater compensation elsewhere. Congress and the Senate have, yet again, kissed the asses of corporate America by selling out what is the only real leverage employees may wage for better pay and treatment.
Thanks again to the Washington’s “greedocrats.”
March 15 "Abuse of Candor" by Arnie SherrThe First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Freedom of the press consists of constitutional or statutory protections pertaining to the media and published materials. With respect to governmental information, any government distinguishes which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. I hope you’ve taken a moment to read the above “First Amendment” definition. Pertaining to the freedoms listed, I am only concerned herein with “Freedom of the Press.” When we speak of “Freedom of the Press” are we giving license to the press to alarm their listeners? Is it moral or of sound judgment to present information that is destructive not only to the secure and safe feelings, such as they are, that most Americans have come to cautiously embrace since 9/11 and also to openly ask questions, the answers of which take a strong position against this new President’s overwhelming and complicated agenda? In spite of “Freedom of the Press,” is it possible that the media has crossed the line? Let me give you a prime example; one of many that John King fostered while interviewing former Vice President Dick Cheney. John King mentioned that President Obama has ordered that all torture initiatives be stopped, that Guantanamo be closed, that detainees be tried out of the Military system; better yet, below is the excerpt from the interview…
KING: You made clear in an interview with the Politico when you left office that you were a little worried that President Obama might not be up to this challenge of fighting terrorism. I want to read you from that interview. You said you think there’s a high probability of such an attempt, meaning a major attack on the United States like 9/11. And you said, whether or not they can pull it off depends whether or not we keep in place policies that have allowed us to defeat all further attempts since 9/11 to launch mass casualty attacks against the United States.” Well, since taking office, President Obama has done these things to change the policies you helped put in place. He has announced he will close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. He has announced he will close CIA black sites around the world, where they interrogate terror suspects. Says he will make CIA interrogators abide by the Army Field Manual, defined waterboarding as torture and ban it, suspend trials for terrorists by military commission, and now eliminate the label of enemy combatants. I’d like to just simply ask you, yes or no, by taking those steps; do you believe the president of the United States has made Americans less safe? CHENEY: I do. I think those programs were absolutely essential to the success we enjoyed of being able to collect the intelligence that let us defeat all further attempts to launch attacks against the United States since 9/11. I think that’s a great success story. It was done legally. It was done in accordance with our constitutional practices and principles. President Obama campaigned against it all across the country. And now he is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack. After witnessing this entire interview, which by the way is filled with many instances of Anti-Obama rhetoric that was coerced by John King’s deliberate questions, I was taken back. Is this the kind of information that is defined as beneficial? Having anyone of experience or authority, answer such deliberately inflammatory and morally destructive questions is undeniably irresponsible. Moreover, I think the entire tone of the interview is “Abuse of Candor.” Legal does make it right! Yes, the First Amendment protects the media with “Freedom of the Press.” But what about patriotism; what about journalistic responsibility, and what about common sense? I state with confidence that most, if not every viewer of tonight’s on-air Cheney interview are more scared now than they were one hour ago, or perhaps since 9/11. Is this to job of the media; to inject fear into the lives of an economically struggling populous? I don’t think so! The entire interview is a horrific example of the worse kind of journalism and John King should be ashamed. You may access the entire transcript by clicking here KING/CHENEY INTERVIEW. President Obama has been in office a mere 50 days, yet the media does all it can to tear down his agenda without offering viable alternatives. Oh yes, they do seat what they title as experts; they speak as if they have a direct line to the President’s staff of 31 world renown economists. Factually, they have little more than “opinions” based on, I don’t know what! John King asked every question possible that offered Dick Cheney multiple opportunities to criticize President Obama’s actions as poor choices, failed agenda, and furthermore, dangerous. This kind of an interview is a deliberate attempt to injure the hopes and dreams of all Americans. Now is the time to get behind Obama, whether you voted for him or not. He is the President and whether you agree or not, his are the only solutions on the table. Isn’t it better to pray and hope he and his advisors are on the correct path than to fight him every step of the way? President Obama is the only game in town and not by accident. Don’t allow this kind of irresponsible reporting to douse your hopes and dreams. Remember? “Yes we can, and we will!”
March 14 Vus, yus consoivatives; vie hew sew engry? by Arnie SherrVus, yus consoivatives; vie hew sew engry? By Arnie Sherr
Vel, I’ll tell ya! Seriously, ya know what really pisses me off? I’ll tell ya what really pisses me off; when the ‘right’ is upset because they are being asked to sacrifice for the good of those less financially fortunate. All we hear from conservatives is their whining about bailing out the Main Street crowd. It’s the same ol’ story; give the rich tax breaks and businesses will grow and result in millions of new jobs for the ‘working-slaves’ that inhabit Main Street. Yes sir, I said ‘slaves’! Over the past twenty years inflation grew at normal paces while those who made all of the growing profits there from never gave a thought towards keeping wages in-line with inflation for the appropriately labeled ‘working slaves’ living on Main Street. Perhaps, if anyone cares to process this information it might just trigger just who is the real cause of today’s economic collapse. When prices go up while salaries do not; a correction is inevitable. Moreover, since this condition was global we are experiencing a global correction, or deflation. It occurs because people can no longer afford the rising prices of goods and services. Yea; a couple of co-incidentals (if you really believe they are) are blamed for having triggered the long-time denied presence of a recession. They are - as if you don’t know - the mega increases in crude prices and the mortgage crisis; “The proverbial straws that broke the camel’s back,” so to say. (My-my! What an appropriate analogy) To be sure, if crude prices had not risen and the mortgage crisis had not been, America and the world would still have arrived to usher in a recession, only later. Inflation of goods and services without relative salary increases is a definite recipe for an eventual deflationary catastrophe. It doesn’t take an economics’ degree to do this math; simple common sense is more than adequate. But, it’s all well and good to look back and play the blame game if it makes us feel better; certainly knowing who is to blame will not rescue America. A strong diverse plan developed by the best economic minds is being implemented as I write this essay. As part of the newly passed Recovery and Investment Plan is a long overdue tax change; strip those who earn over $250,000 per year of their tax breaks and subsidies; then lower taxes for those who reside on Main Street. Sounds okay to me; estimates are that employees will receive and average increase in the net pay of $15 per week. That’s roughly $780 per year. Multiply that by the almost 133 million working Americans earning under $250,000 per year living on Main Street and you’ll realize that an approximate additional $104 billion dollars will be spent on goods and services right here in America, by Americans. And to make this possible, President Obama is going to strip those who earn more than $250,000 per years of tax breaks and corporate subsidies. Perhaps these whining greed mongers might consider taking off their blinders and calculate that 133 million Americans are already beginning to spend this newly realized $104 billion dollars in their small and large businesses. Can they not see that “trickle-up” in the end earns much more than that to which their tax breaks of old amounted? Even a ‘caveman’ can figure-out this common sense premise. Conservative tax breaks follow an ideology (Trickle-down Theory) first thought of and implemented by a democratic President, John F Kennedy; it didn’t work then and it didn’t work for President Reagan either. Would it have had any chance of creating new jobs, they would be created, not here but in India, China, and other outsourcing countries. Exxon gets tremendous tax breaks and still reports record profits. Is there not something terribly wrong with that picture? We are bailing-out American banks who continue to screw us while they spend, without oversight or regulation, the billions we taxpayers will be strapped with for decades to come. I ask again; “is there not something wrong with this picture?” Wake-up America! The conservative “actors’ know the straight skinny; they are simply trying to save their “brand.” Their objections have little to do with what will and what won’t work; they’ve more to do with trying to save their party, its ideals, and failed policies. But even more selfish; they are bent on saving their career politician jobs. If you are a conservative or liberal earning greater than $250,000 annually, stop and think for just one minute about the already being realized $104 billion dollars Main Street residents are beginning to find in the paychecks. In spite of the almost 12 million unemployed there are soon to be expanding opportunities in all businesses large and small. I think now is a good time to start vying for this new influx of wage-earned monies by restarting ad campaigns, purchasing or manufacturing great new and exciting merchandise to attract this new money into your cash drawers, registers, and bank accounts. It won’t be long before your tax breaks and subsidies of the past become just that; past memories, best forgotten. Additionally, the large sums being given to states for infrastructure maintenance and improvements are already putting people back to work. Soon new green initiative opportunities will be sprouting like summer buds on an orange blossom tree in spring. More product turns means more cash for your registers, cash drawers, and bank accounts. It’s not about party affiliation or career politician futures; it is about the health of Main Street because they have been and always will be the primary resource that fuels the growth of small and large enterprise; not tax breaks and subsidies. Tax breaks and subsidies do not purchase products and services; they simply tell business owners “take the day off on us.”
March 03 “Wall Street’s impatience” I don't give ah' hoot! by Arnie Sherr“Wall Street’s impatience” I don’t give ah’ hoot! By Arnie Sherr
Ya’ know; I am not one who plays the odds on Wall Street. I am however; content to live on Main Street. I’ve been here all of the 66 plus years and throughout my life I’ve been un-moved one way or the other by the ranting of the “upscale” that hang their big egos on Wall Street. In fact, I’m rather tired of hearing the whining. They’ve got the bucks; lives of luxury, the cash with which to gamble. Is their addiction any less sick than an addiction to horse racing, black jack tables or the slots? Theirs is just the wealthy’s chance-a-thon, whilst I and many who still have self control restrict ourselves to a mere $30 bucks when we visit the nearby Indian owned Hard Rock Casino just east of Tampa. Is there really a difference?
Whilst these moneyatics cry of no confidence, millions of Americans are loosing their homes, their jobs, their nest eggs; yes, for some even their sanity. So now the airwaves are flooded with news of NYSE and Dow droppings as if they emanate from the hind quarters of an over fed eagle – with wings spread in flight it caws, “who cares about the middle class?”
As the great Clarke Gable once performed “Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn.” Putting the right side whiner’s aside, our new President - barely one month in office is at least doing much more than whining. While others, wallowing in impatience with mouths spewing garbage the likes of which regurgitate from festering abdomens resembling of Rush Limbaugh, are very soon to bow their heads in shame as the markets slowly rally because Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan causes remarkable positives to evidence his judgment which, doth prevail over right-side politics as usual. I only pray that right-side constituents remember how out of touch the conservative theology of past years remains. It is that very theology that has placed us in this position. “Oh Ollie, what a predicament you’ve gotten us into”
I haven’t taken a survey, but I can’t help but to believe that the conservatives who are loosing their homes, out of work and applying for food stamps, forced to mooch off family for room and board, looking to bankruptcy courts for relief, and more aren’t asking, “If you; yes you, the republicrats I wasted my votes on; all I hear is criticism of the Obama initiative, the same-ol’ same-ol’. I hear nothing from you guys that sounds any different from the policies that put us here. If it put us here over the past eight years then how can the same failed agenda save us? Maybe Obama’s plan will bust; maybe not. At least he’s doin’ something different. It seems his is the only horse running. I rather enthuse the jockey, than try to trip the horse during the first furlong. Right now, horse number “1 Trillion” has left the gate in a flurry; the winds of controversy against its mane; the course, an uphill 30 degree incline to the finish. Personally, I’d rather bet on a clean finish than the worn-out cause of it all.
God bless the elephant; “they never forget the “face” of failure.”
"Can we "talk too much" within our resumes? by Arnie SherrCan we “Talk too much” within our resumes? By Arnie Sherr
An important fact; companies today are inundated with resumes from the more than 11 million unemployed. Having said that; it is important when writing resumes they be kept that as “pointed” and as “short” as is humanly possible. Time is precious and the task of perusing the overwhelming numbers of resumes is, to say the least, tedious and time consuming.
Because of the above it is beneficial to make the process as easy as possible for those whose job it is to read and evaluate cover letters and resumes. Herein I will define two ways of accomplishing this in an efficient and acceptable manner.
The first consideration has to do with “relevance.” I realize how proud we are about past employment and all that was learned and well-practiced therein; however, prospective employers are not interested in duties and responsibilities that have little or nothing to do with the position of which they are seeking to fill.
The second consideration; employers have little interest in jobs going back farther than about eight to tens years, relevant or not. Having said this does not mean that relevant awards and accomplishments and maybe a few applicable skills from prior positions can not be intertwined within your cover letter and resume. Experienced writers of these important career seeking documents are able to involve all relevant matters skillfully without building a long tireless list of past employers. Perhaps if the list is too long it may illustrate employment instability which is advisably, better not to reveal.
It is generally professed resumes should be no more than two pages; keeping them to one page enhances their chances of being read. And perhaps, if your resume is just a tad over one page the content can then be presented in 13 or 14 pt type making reading it, although two pages, easier for the reader. In either case, chances of your resume being read are greatly improved.
Another benefit of eliminating older employment affiliations is that having done so leaves more room for elaborating of those qualities, skills, and abilities most relevant to the position for which you are applying.
Then straight skinny; what used to take thirteen applications to get one interview has now tripled. Being there are fewer jobs and greater numbers of applicants it has, for employers, become a buyer’s market. Only those who best play by the rules will first, be interviewed and second, win the offer. Learning how to interview is yet another reality; but is also of a different writing.
It is best to think of your resume as a spec sheet. Its content must be relevant only to the job for which you are applying. Expressing your passions, beliefs, and other attributes are best involved within a well written advertisement (your cover letter). Be assured, it is the cover letter that encourages the reading of your resume.
Being more explicit, if you are seeking to “employ” within your office a new computer your attention may be caught by an ad in the local newspaper for just such a computer. The ad being well written and presented, you are encouraged to go to where the computer is displayed and examine its spec sheet – generally displayed near or close to all items for consumer appraisal. To summarize; the ad (cover letter) brought you to the store to investigate (interview) this computer (applicant). Once there (at the interview) you read the computer’s spec sheet (resume), and now (as will an interviewer), you must decided if this computer (applicant) aptly fills your needs (qualifies). The salesperson (you) asks “how would you like to pay for this computer; cash or credit?” (You ask,” When shall I start; this Monday or is next Monday better?”)
Be clear, only that which is relevant to the needs of the interested buyer (employer) are listed to the computer’s spec sheet (resume). The ad (cover letter) drew the consumer into the store to examine (interview) the computer.
What I have attempted illustrating above is “job marketing” as opposed to “job searching.” After all, just like the computer which, for all intent and purpose represents for the retailer (its employer) profits; just as you, as an employee represents for your employer (the retailer) profits – “employees = profits because they are the difference between their salaries and their productivity.” When products no longer sell and yield acceptable profits they are generally discontinued; when employee productivity suffers, they too may be subsequently discontinued.
The ultimate objective of the hiring process; from writing cover letters and resumes to participating within the interview process is to demonstrate more effectively than your competition that you will produce a greater “profit” margin between your salary and your productivity. Please, do not misconstrue the above; this means not that you accept a lower salary; it means you are uniquely qualified to perform better than all others for a greater than anticipated salary.
“You’ve studied, worked, and learned hard to be good at and qualify for your chosen profession; study, work, and learn just as hard, if not harder, to find the right place in which you may best practice that which you’ve so dedicated and committed to be.”
Happy job hunting! February 28 From where did you receive your wealth? Could it have been from Main Street? by Arnie SherrFrom where did you receive your wealth? Could it have been from Main Street? By Arnie Sherr
I write this not as a democrat or as a republican; but rather as a well informed and intuitive senior who hears clearly from both ears tremendous varieties of opinion about whether those who have declared themselves authorities over our present economic dilemma are correct in pursuing the present course. What impacts most is those from which I hear this myriad of opinion, few are 100% succinct. In fact, were it not for their desire not to come to blows, I think malady might occur in the streets of America. Ahh, a heated subject for most it is!
Yes, I hear the passion in everyone’s voice. I thought I had it figured out; but, like most I am remain confused. I won’t waste time writing of the staggering numbers and comparisons thereof; what I will write is of its only viable solution. I am not alone as many TV news media pundits and guests have made this same suggestion.
Although many wealthy Americans have been fortunate to have been born after family wealth had been achieved, many not so inherently fortunate were able to accumulate their own wealth during recent years. But from and through whom did their precious wealth emanate? I submit that its birth flowed from the buying habits of Main Street. Even if theirs grew more from Wall Street strategies, that which influenced market ups and downs was directly attributed to the spending habits of those residing on Main Street. Ergo my question, from where did you receive your wealth? And, Could it have been from Main Street?
We, those who inhabit Main Street criticize those of Wall Street and those who CEO major American Banks and other financial institutions as being greedy and not giving a hoot about those living on Main Street. Although I feel this summation to be accurate I must confess I wish daily that such wealth might fall my way ASAP. I suspect I am not in the minority!
So, I guess its okay to depict Ken Lewis, the CEO of Bank of America and the big three automaker CEO’s and others who have been berated by Congressional hearing officiates as incompetent; but, is it okay to criticize them for their thirst for more and more wealth? Is this not a kind of double standard?
Me; well I buy a lotto tickets twice weekly and any other time I’m near a lottery machine I buy two or three scratch tickets. I tell myself “hope I win enough to pay for the groceries I just bought” when in fact, I thirst for the biggest prize printed to the ticket front – “$1000.00 per week for Life” and etc.
Myopic may be the word I attribute to President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. Why? Simply because we are in unchartered waters and history tells varying stories of similar but nowhere as big challenges. Who shall I believe; to what myopic agenda shall I buy in? Although the pundits and their guests have much to say (yea and nay), it is from those with whom I cross paths daily that I reference most. I can only surmise; if something is so complicated and controversial it may not be what it is cracked up to be! So, what then is the solution?
Reversing an original Thomas Jefferson quote yields quite the opposite; “If you give back to those who worked for the benefit of those who would not, our Democracy will be revived” it is apparent and only a “caveman” cannot envision of its meaning that the solution lays in the pockets of the American people; especially those who reside on Main Street. I revel that within this reversal is the “trees for the forest” solution; If we must borrow and create debt for the taxpayer then give that which is borrowed to those who shall be forced to pay it back, the taxpayer.
It is predicted that before all is done our government may spend of our open ended debt as much as one, two or even as much as three trillion dollars; one failed exercise after another. There are some 140,000,000 working Americans and adding to that a lesser number of retired, at the end of 2007 was 50 million; it is then reasonable to send a check in the neighborhood of approximately $35,000 to each of those Americans who's incomes are under $300,000 annually, and to those collecting social security. Can it be imagined how quickly the American people shall fix the problem?
The congress in it present state of hypocrisy will not be required to determine the degree of punishment for those companies and corporations who through all of this have been exposed for their unethical and sometimes illegal abuses on the American people. Now, the American people will decide with whom to do business; with whom to save their monies, and with whom to invest for theirs and their children’s futures.
This is not rocket science; yet the American people remain apathetic while of varying degrees of objection over the President’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. We need to stand-up and make ourselves heard.
Moreover, it is the American people who are responsible for the wealth of the wealthiest; the comfort of those rich, and the stable finances of those who’s ranting continues on Wall Street; yet their ambivalence is obvious and disconcerting to those on Main Street. But then I ask, who among wouldn’t rather be ranting, living off our riches, or basking carelessly in our mega-wealth? Let’s no be too hard on the rich and famous; I believe they like this as little as we.
We and they must stand and be heard. In the 60’s marches on Washington were common expressions; thousands of sixteen wheelers lined Pennsylvania Avenue in protest of high diesel prices at the pump, equal righter’s paraded in many cities to be heard; who I ask, is protesting now?
Send e-mails; write letters; march if you must; but please speak-up before it is too late. February 25 “The audacity of support” by Arnie Sherr“The audacity of support” By Arnie Sherr
January 20, 2009; the world witnessed the swearing-in of he who represents “hope for change”; “a new direction and a rekindling of confidence that for Main Street may draw new maps from which travel on the newly polished ‘streets paved of gold’ may lead many back to their “American dreams.” A popular and electoral majority made a huge statement last November 11th when America watched with hopeful anticipation this new inspiration; a man whose political rookyism offers America comparatively untainted leadership, prevail. Barack Obama has promised to tackle the insurmountable array of intricate challenges ever to face a newly elected President and America. Having said that, I amiss to understand the degree of political maneuvering that is being orchestrated by the other side of the isle. Defiant statements of irrational objection to what a team of America’s leading economists allay as the only sensible strategy that supports spending aggressively to employ huge numbers of Americans and more, undermines for purely political motives what 82% of Americans feel is a worthy plan. It takes not a genius to calculate; of the 82 percent for, 32 percent are republicans. Considering that the previous three presidential elections demonstrated unequivocally that America is evenly divided in and of both parties, rational political wanna-stays may want to reconsider their misguiding loyalty of outdated and historically failed ideologies as possibly undermining future successful runs for re-election. Since 82% poll as supporting the president’s agenda which, if as most believe will be successful, of those who are in support will be credited for their good judgment in future elections regardless of their party affiliation. The risk of defiance is apparent. The risks of support are none simply because if the plans should fail all will be judged equally for its failure. Neither side will take a disproportionate hit. One the other hand; should the plan succeed, those who stood against will be remembered for their poor judgment as though perched atop the Washington monument with neon arrows pointed toward the heads.
“It is safer to fail in unison than to fail in single celebrity; but to win in single celebrity does indeed earn the Oscar remarkably – it is best to first understand the theory of probability” by Arnie Sherr
“The Theory of Probability” may be externally influened. That is to say, if a majority in favor actively works, in addition to verbally supporting towards an end no matter how obscure or elusive, its probability of success is greatly enhanced. Understanding this theorem, it is wise that the minority against effective join those who by popular opinion support overwhelmingly the President’s “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.” It is far better to ride the current than attempt swimming against its accumulated force. Those who prevail against the current produce more who are destined once against to fight the current. Effective solutions do effectively reverse the flow yielding strong probability of non-recurrence! So I say to the 38 of 41 who believe they RIGHTeously oppose, it is time to join city hall; probability strongly suggests “most that fight city hall, lose.” Supporting that which is unprecedented is tenuous at best. That is why most will get behind that which is usually proved to be supported by historical knowledge; the term generally assigned to courses of actions that deal with unprecedented agenda is aptly “ an educated guess.” Emotions and feelings have proved to be harmful criteria in the decision making process; whereas facts mostly drive appropriate courses. The facts are, 82% of Americans supports President Obama’s “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.” Let he or she who defies probability bet small; if not, their losses may outweigh the loudness of their defiance! February 14 "Pinch me; I must be sleeping" by Arnie Sherr“Pinch me; I must be dreaming” Who advises the Republican minority on economic matters? By Arnie Sherr
The List: Obama's Economists from BlogSpot.com
Below is an extensive list of President Obama’s impressive economic advisors. For each there are links that will open for you their experience, qualifications and more. I bring this to you simply to illustrate a point or better said; a challenge of an overt display of ignorance. I’ll continue at the bottom of this list assuming you’ve the patience and fortitude to thoroughly examine each of the economists below.
Other prominent economists who support Obama:
Prominent finance people who support Obama:
Hopefully you’ve, at least, looked into more than few of the listed bios; if not, then I assume you as do many rational Americans believe they are the elite where economic issues are concerned. Especially when they who “never forget a face,” portray themselves as more economically attuned than those who inhabit the above listing of economic academia. I am miffed!
I am aware many haven’t the time as do I to tune in CSpan and CSpan-II to witness a variety of speeches subjected on the President’s hurried economic plan. I’ll go on the record as saying that both ideologies are portrayed by some as inappropriate and virtually ignorant of the task at hand. Having said that, it is well to note the Democratic side of the isle overwhelmingly supported the Presidents economic plan. The plan was criticized from a thousand angles, mostly propagandized by the republican right. But, that’s okay; it is how business is done in Washington.
Then, of what do I find objection? I listened to numerous Senators and House reps. speak of too much spending a not enough tax cuts; all well and except for one thing. They are for the most part Lawyers, not economists. They speak not for the good of Main Street but to perpetrate the same divide that has put us where we are today, partisanism. It’s not what’s right; it is merely a matter of degrading the opposition regardless of the price.
Not wishing to sound anti-republican I state emphatically, if a republican president would be presenting a similar plan the Democrats would do not different.
When in God’s name will this immature bickering cease? The Constitution (our Founders) called for a representative Government. It was not then and is not now the plan that Americans make a career of being Senators and Congresspersons. Realistically, Joe the Plumber should be able to run for the Senate or the House. There should be two year terms so Special Interest groups can not become so connected.
I don’t know if Obama’s plan will work or not; in fact, the economists can’t be certain either. But, if I have to support those who know it shall be the impressive list of economists that Obama has consulted in constructing his plan; not the ravings of 635 mad political economist wannabes.
Last week while watching the Senate debate the plan, I actually heard Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) say, “I think we should do nothing.” Is he serious? Remember, of course, Senator Cornyn couldn’t find his way to Main Street with a GPS. These guys and gals, for the most are Lawyers, yet they think they know better than 31 of the most renowned economists in the world.
Pinch me; I must be dreaming!!! Letter to Bank of America CEO, Ken LewisFebruary 14, 2009
Ken Lewis, CEO Bank of America 100 Tryon Street Charlotte. NC 282202-4000
Dear Mr. Lewis: At last weeks Senate oversight hearing you said, “I get it, and I’ll make sure Bank of America get’s it!” Mr. Lewis, I am not sure that you really do “get it.” In fact, I don’t believe the hypocrites that grilled you and the other CEO’s adjacent to you at the hearing really “get it.” But, I’ll tell you what; the American people “get it” and of that you can be sure. Since America’s banks have been able to stretch their immense reach across state lines they have learned how to disrespect those who made them so big and profitable to begin with; they are the people who by yours and all the other “so called” American banks continually abuse by charging outrageous interest rates (once consider loan shark rates), fees for using ATM’s, and your bank Sir, actually refused to cash a check written on your bank unless I paid a fee for a service that no other bank would ever consider as an option. It was that abusive and personal insult that has engrained in me a total lack of respect for your bank and since you seat as CEO, any respect I held for you had disintegrated at that very moment. And now Mr. Lewis you sit before Senate and Congressional reps and seek help from the American people. How much crow must you be eating? I may not be as wealthy as you but I can say without exception, I sleep much better in my mediocre existence than do you in your wealth. If I had the power I would, before giving or lending my tax dollars to Bank of America demand your resignation. Aren’t you fortunate that those self-serving mental midgets that are regretfully trusted with the task of deciding the future of America’s banking system are not me and others who live on Main Street? Moreover Mr. Lewis, I’ve as much faith in them as I do you. Having said that, I am going to tell you what will restore America’s confidence in the collapsing banking system of which, decades ago, was an example of good business globally.
STOP RAPING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE – STOP GIVING CHECKING ACCOUNTS AND CREDIT CARDS TO ELLIGAL ALIENS – REMOVE ATM CHARGES – LOWER CREDIT CARD INTEREST RATES – RE-INSTITUTE GRACE PERIODS FOR LOAN AND CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS – INTEGRATE COMPUTER CONTROLS THAT WILL NOT PERMIT CREDIT CARD HOLDERS TO EXCEED CREDIT LIMITS – STOP OUTSOURCING CUSTOMER JOBS – AND MORE… MR. LEWIS, IT’S TIME TO EARN THE HELP YOU SEEK.
I am not fooled nor are the American people. We have witnessed the gradual denigration of corporate integrity going on 20 or 30 years. This infection is spreading so rapidly that America’s college grads are entering the corporate world believing “it’s okay as long as I don’t get caught.” You Mr. Lewis are part of this viral anomaly. Having released my anger at all who seat CEO status through you, I offer generously my advice that, even coming from a senior whose life was and is happily spent on Main Street, is sure to help America regain some modicum of trust and confidence in corporate America and as a bonus; you may sleep just a bit better than now. Remember, what goes around comes around. It is time to stop that vicious cycle and only you and others within your world of influence can do so. Perhaps Mr. Lewis, such changes will not benefit me; certainly they will benefit my children, their children and so on as well as all who come after I am a mere memory. You can emerge as a kind of ‘future savior.” Yours is among the most influential CEO strongholds in the corporate environment. You may use it wisely or as in the past, selfishly. I leave that decision with you to tussle.
I believe compassion is stronger the greed; that it is better to give (back) than to receive. How bout’ you?
I’ll pray for you; “God’s strength”
ARNOLD SHERR, President
P.S., I have posted this letter to numerous blogs; a positive response? – Well, I’ll leave that to you!
January 20 9 Secrets to a winning Interview Presentation by Arnie Sherr9 Secrets to a winning Interview Presentation By Arnold Sherr Your audience has assembled, the curtain is about to rise; are you ready? Imagine the redundancy involved with interviewing a multitude of applicant’s day in and day out. How then will you captivate your audience? To follow are nine steps which, as briefly as described are the basic recipe for cooking up a great results-oriented interview. Controlling from the start: Essentially, job interviews are sales presentations! Just as in sales, it is he or she who controls the process that shall wear home the gold medal. Whatever position is being interviewed to fill, assuming and maintaining control are clear signs of leadership and sales ability. Moreover, this may be the only opportunity an applicant is afforded in which sales and leadership abilities may be proved by example; far more effective than simple rhetoric. In fact, interviews present many unique opportunities to eliminate statements that infer applicants ‘are’ by demonstrating rather than simply stating as if reading a laundry list of characteristics and attributes (I.e., “I am an exceptional leader, I am a proved effective salesperson, I have exceptional communicative skills, I am personable, get along well with other and have developed excellent people skills, etc”). Digging Deep: Directing an effective interview presentation; one that will have interviewers on their toes requires more than the usual question and response format. Moreover, it is extremely important to uncover the specific ‘needs’ being sought. In as much as most applicants interviewing for a specific career designation will have been selected partly because they have in common a combination of skills and attributes inherent of the position’s requirements, there still remains certain unique and explicit objectives; the goal of which is the interviewers to identify in and of the applicants before them. Those who demonstrate equitable solutions to those specifics, certainly improve their chances of prevailing. The question remains, how can the applicant uncover and address these very important wants and needs? By ‘digging deep”; asking the right questions, involving interviewers in probing discussions, and generally being clever and innovative (another example of demonstrating rather than stating) most times will bring such concerns to the top of the list. They who inhabit the sales leader-board have mastered the ability to identify customer (interviewer) hot buttons; those special wants and needs that if satisfied most times result in an easy and successful close. Applicants should have the same objective throughout. More is Better vs. Less is More: There is in sales a long-time teaching that points directly to un-complicating presentation content; “KISS” (Keep it Simple Stupid). The relevance of “less is more” is uncanny. It is unwise to make interview presentations top-heavy by filling it with everything but the kitchen sink; amazingly, some even make room for the sink, as well. “What the eye sees, the heart believes” and “Actions speak louder than words” are two seldom over-used principles. More to the point, incorporating them into interview presentations may purposely lessen required rhetoric. After all, it is never necessary to state the obvious! Practice Delivery: Famous and those acclaimed best actors who perform their specifics over an over to varied audiences must sound each time as if it is the first and only. They must present the same enthusiasm and vitality each and every time the play is performed; generally two or three times daily, six days a week. Unfortunately, interviews are fewer in number and most times much less frequent. Therefore, keeping-up, or should I say - like the actor - rehearsing over and over is mandatory; it helps keep interview presentations fresh, exhilarating, and interesting. Too much humor can be an interview ruiner: True as it is, interviewing can be trying and a bit of wit can go a long way in relaxing and bettering what for many is a tense experience. However, appearances of Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien will do great harm and little good. Interviews are not the time or place for comedy. Although inducing smiles and chuckles reduces tension, it is important to stay focused and keep audiences focused as well. Little enough is retained after the average interview; hopefully at least 20% from memory - taking interviewers off on unrelated mental journeys is counterproductive and ill-advised. Minimize you – “SIZZLE” them: "Frankly, interviewers care little about employment histories; they do however care about adding to their team an employee who has demonstrated the skills to solve specific challenges of which they are faced. Write a presentation script that honors the audience (interviewer) with the lead role; they who face the challenges that you will help them to solve. “Is it the recipe that titillates the taste buds or perhaps the result of said recipe?” Please, do not sell from the spec sheet (resume); sell solutions, remedies, and preventive measures. Most with whom applicants compete can perform that which is specked, few can effectively solve, cure, and prevent future occurrences, and do so at the interview with little or no time for analysis. Even if suggested solutions are a bit amiss, the fact that having demonstrating the affinity to challenge-solve spontaneously is admired and will, I assure you, be recalled. By the way; doing so is another “actions speak louder than words” demonstration. Speak the Language: Assume for safety sake interviewers are not of literary genius. Leave out 50¢ words; speak clearly with emotion and believability. Place monotonous voice patterns in the “trash bin.” Know your script and make no assumptions. Be conscious to eliminate ah’s and uh’s while speaking; moments of silence better replace these and other verbal distractions effectively. Moreover, saying these “stall words” (they permit time to think) distract listeners and more important, they contradict what is generally written to resumes; “excellent communication skills.” It is soon realized, rehearsing presentation scripts is the best way to reduce or eliminate the need to “stall for thought.” Believability: Actors who reach their goals of achievement do so by creating the illusion of believability; they are who they portray while performing, not themselves. Being believable builds what I call the “integrity of the role; of the presentation; of the part; of the messenger. It is important to remember, what is being sold at interviews is not the person, it is solutions, contributions, and productivity standards that is ultimately ‘sought’ and when found ‘bought’. Just as actors become the character they are selling, applicants must become the ‘product’ which best solves employer needs; they are in essence the messenger, not themselves. If anyone has ever said to you “sell yourself,” you may now answer “I can and I will.” Urgency and a single objective: After courting or being courted by a soon to be spouse, I’m sure when it was decided to pop or answer the “will you” question it is clear that this person is the only one; no others waiting in the wings. How about if when popped or having just been popped the question there is a suspicion that either the asker of or the asked have possibly second or even third marital choices waiting, once again, in the wings. Perhaps either lacks the “integrity of the role.” In any case, an answer to this scenario is academic; I am sure. However, most times interviewers are aware some applicants are investigating or have investigated other employment options and may even have other interviews scheduled or possibly offers, already on the table. Many times when offers of employment are presented interviewers have second and maybe third choices selected just in case their first choice defects. But, consider this; if during a particular interview an applicant tells with passion and believability that there is only one employment goal, to work for this company. That as long as can be remembered and because of good things heard; the companies’ terrific reputation, and the remarkably wonderful way in which employees are treated, here is where I want to work and be apart of this team, grow and prosper while contributing unselfishly towards this companies’, no other’s, success, growth, and profits.
When the “Will you marry me” question is posed it is assumed and believed there are no other choices; if not, who in their right mind would answer “YES”? And who will ask the question unless sure the asked is believed to be likewise as committed.
You be the judge! January 17 “An Honest Mistake; Obama says of Tim Geithner?” An editorial by Arnie Sherr“An Honest Mistake; Obama says of Tim Geithner?” An editorial by Arnie Sherr The Huffington Post January 13, 2009 reports: President-elect Barack Obama's choice to run the Treasury Department and lead the nation's economic rescue failed to pay $34,000 in taxes from 2001 to 2004, but the last-minute disclosure didn't stop Senate Democrats from moving forward with his nomination. Timothy Geithner had paid some of the back taxes in 2006 after the IRS sent him a bill. When the Obama transition team discovered he owed even more back taxes, Geithner paid those additional taxes days before Obama announced his choice in November, according to materials released by the Senate Finance Committee considering his nomination. It is true so say I, many pundits, and large numbers of Americans; Tim Geithner’s conscious evasion of what is a significant income tax obligation is by no means an act which has not been committed by many (numbers of, un-researched) who knowingly attempt to evade their legal tax obligations. Perhaps in their naiveté they think it may surpass the statute of limitations or maybe they are just wishing blindly; I don’t know! What I do know and what I’ve always been taught; file and not pay results in fines and penalties – maybe even wage garnishment / however, failing to file is a felony. Bloomberg News reports: The IRS estimates that as many as half of these employees subject to U.S. tax fail to report their wages, claim deductions they are not entitled to, incorrectly establish" retirement plans, "fail to pay self-employment tax or fail to file tax returns," the agency said in a March 22, 2007, news release. Geithner, who prepared his own tax returns in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2005, and used paid preparers in other years, acknowledged receiving a written guide on how to pay the self-employment taxes he owed, according to a summary of the case by the Senate Finance Committee. Understand, I’ve been a diehard Obama supporter and my internet support for him is wide-spread, but of this matter I hold serious misgivings. This appointment places Timothy Geithner in charge of the Internal Revenue Service. I can not help but feel, if Geithner, as the IRS reports is as mistaken as the almost half referred to in the Bloomberg News report above that neglected similar obligations is likewise ignorant of these basic legalities: is he qualified for this huge responsibility? And worse, what says this about Obama for playing-down Geithner’s integrity and ethic’s flaw? President Elect Obama has described Geithner’s obvious evasion as an ‘honest mistake’. Mistakes are inadvertent; incorrect, unwise, or unfortunate acts or decisions which are not caused or perpetuated by bad judgment or a lack of information or care. In this case, Timothy Geithner made a conscious decision to commit the felonious act evading his income filing legal obligations. The fact that taxes owed are paid or not is irrelevant and certainly should not be a consideration with respect to his Treasury Secretary Cabinet appointment. Tax evasion; well, that’s a whole different scenario. I take serious exception to President Elect Obama’s assertion that Geithner’s tax issue was an “honest mistake.” Conscious felonious acts are not mistakes, and to label it as “honest” is a contradiction of the hugest of proportions; they are, by all standards of ethics and legal interpretation criminal behavior. I am disappointed with Barack Obama for his attempt to minimize this very serious and what should be a disqualifying factor of the Geithner appointment. Furthermore, I’ve written many essays on the negatives (corporate greed, Enron, Ponzie scams, selling Senate seats, Paulson’s loose distribution of tax payer funds, etc) that continue to demonstrate to our children and young adults that it is okay to ignore the rules and principles of ethics, integrity, and law which, of old had raised America to a standard that attracted peoples around the world to admire and fantasize coming to and prospering in this great nation. Unfortunately, America is now in an economic quagmire because the ideals I and many of my generation and before had been taught and preached of have yielded within generations that followed greedy and corrupt tendencies of human behavior with a complete lack of conscience; “it’s okay if you don’t get caught”! President Elect Obama, I can not in good faith ignore the egregious message you are transmitting by labeling Geithner’s acts as an ‘honest mistake’. This great country is bountiful of ingenious and honest potential public servants; I strongly urge you select another Secretary of the Treasury.
January 12 "If you were to be homeless, in which of the 195 countries on earth would you prefer to be so" by Arnie Sherr“If you were to homeless, in which of the 195 countries on earth would you prefer to be so?” By Arnie Sherr
There is so much economic devastation goin’ on right now. The best of the best say things will get worse before they get better. Unemployment, it is predicted, may be as high as 9 percent by 2010. Thousands of retail store closings, small, and large businesses, are projected to in 2009. Foreclosures continue to rise. Financial institutions still refuse to lend. Colleges and universities struggle to maintain present tuition levels by reducing application acceptance. Competition of available jobs is overwhelming and the mental health of United States citizens is in jeopardy.
Life for many has become excruciatingly difficult; mere existence tries boundaries of sanity for so many unfortunates. One good thing that has risen from so much bad; societal crooks are rising to the surface; Ponzie scams, insider trading, poor C Level performance, failing mega-corps, Enron and the likes of, and so much yet to uncloak are for those homeless and downtrodden of little consolation, to be sure.
I’ve no surveyed results supporting my forthcoming personal opinion and in as much as I am not now nor have I ever been homeless, I am confident to suggest, if I were to ask 1000 homeless persons “Of the 195 countries that make up the earth and considering you are homeless is there any country other than the United States in which you would prefer to be homeless?” an astoundingly high percent will answer NO.
I know this in my heart because over almost 65 years, living through easy and tough times alike and knowing many others experiencing parallel challenges; ups and downs, hills and valleys, some with criminal backgrounds and past incarcerations, I believe given this very question most, if not all would prefer to remain Americans in America. I submit further, even if I could demonstrate a better homeless existence elsewhere they will still remain steadfast; “I’ll stay right here on American soil, homeless or otherwise” I’m sure will be their reply.
Don’t you see; Americans are unique and loyal, no matter what! Even when racial prejudice threatened blacks with hanging in the Deep South; when they were whipped and enslaved like animals; when the homeless were spit on in major cities and arrested for vagrancy in rural areas; when riots burned neighborhoods and business communities to the ground; when fraud reduced life-time pensions to zero, and when terrorists threatened the very fiber of American stamina and dedication to each others well-being - and now even though millions are losing their homes and jobs there are no defections to the south, north, east, or across the seas to better opportunity. All Americans know, regardless of the tests of time there is no place like home, America the Beautiful.
We’ve survived the British, WW I, WW II, the Korean War, Pearl Harbor, Vietnam, the Cold War, Bay of Pigs; terror attacks on Naval Ships, the Twin Towers parking garages, US Embassies, hijacked airplanes, 9-11, and Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom, North Korea, and more. Now American’s will survive and prevail over this economic pandemic. We, as always will unite and chip-in for all we are worth to once again climb out, upward, and stand proud and tall for the world and each other.
After all, we are Americans; it is what we do!
Letter to Debbie Stabenow D-MIJanuary 12, 2009
Senator Debbie Stabenow D-MI 133 Hart Bldg Fax Number: 202.228.0325 Re: Your January 12, 2009 oration to the Senate
Dear Senator Stabenow:
It is now 6:00 PM Eastern Time; I am listening to your presentation to the Senate and even as the democrat I am, I have reservations that much of your statement ignores some very important references; much of it is inaccurate and attacks any possibility of non-divisiveness.
When I joined your statement, you were speaking of spending priorities; republican ideals of more are less except when more meets their need and priorities. I submit the reverse is mirrored within Democratic Party ideals. Both sides are conciliatory to their own interests. Your speech was critical of the other side of the isle when both sides are equally culpable for present societal deteriorates. I am continually amazed at the hypocrisy that continues to promote divisiveness in and of all three branches.
You went on to identify the last eight years as majorly responsible for what appears as an economic pandemic; you made specific reference to “trickle down” and attached its ownership to the other side. Factually, it was JFK who first attempted to benefit from the so-called “trickle down theory,” Both his and Reagan’s attempts at “trickle down” were failed agenda. After a verbal back and forth with Mike Dukakis I learned a basic truth about trickle down; why it has not and will never be a viable program - spending has always been too high to benefit from “trickle down,” and to add my own; a basic main street benefit was to be the jobs that would emerge from a successful “trickle down.” Since 90 percent of America’s manufacturing and customer service industries are now outsourced any “trickle down” of jobs, were this program to have worked, would benefit only East Indians, Indonesians, the Chinese and other outsourcing destinations; certainly not American working classes. Since as far back as I can remember administrations have fought to balance the budget; that being the case, it is understandable why spending could never be small enough that “trickle down” will even benefit outsourcing nations. Factually, “trickle down” has always been a misnomer; one the republicans love to altruistically reference as theirs when history shows it to have been from the innovative mind of John F Kennedy, a Democratic President.
But, let’s move on: You singled out the last eight years insinuating the America’s woes are at the hands of the republicans; how unfair and inaccurate! What is tearing-up America now was not born of the last eight years. It was in its infancy when I was a boy, some 50 or so years ago. Being in the toy industry in my early twenties I was witness to insurmountable outsourcing; it has only grown since. CAFTA and NAFTA have been supported by both the Dems and the Repubs going back at least six Presidencies. Furthermore, what irks me to no end is when I heard former President Clinton and Senator Clinton join President Bush in continuing to endorse Free Trade; the surrendering of America’s sovereignty and the kissing goodbye to our manufacturing and customer service bases.
With respect to the mortgage crisis; why don’t you ask Senator Dodd where the oversight was with Fannie and Freddy? Why he and his committee allowed Fannie and Freddy to become so big and to disregard credit criteria permitting unqualified Americans to become homeowners; this can not be laid exclusively at the hands of other side. You shall be required to go much farther back to find whose poor judgment implemented such stupidity.
You spoke of the American people as knowing who, where, when, and why we are where we are right now; you are so wrong! Most Americans believe only that which their favorite TV stations profess – right or wrong. The likes of Rush Limbaugh, Hannity and Combs (God bless Combs for his patience and tolerance), Fox News and many other bias reporting’s emanating from both the “fair and balanced” to the “most experienced news team” and others. More realistically, most Americans are struggling to keep jobs, pay mortgages, borrow so theirs can go to college, put gas in the car and food on the table, make Cobra payments, budget down to unemployment income levels, and so much more. No Senator, most Americans haven’t a clue. The ones you communicate with might understand; but madam, they are not the most of; they are the fewest of.
I am a dedicated and loyal Democrat, but Senator Debbie Stabenow if it is your intent to bring both sides together you might be better served to own-up and meet the blame in the very same middle isle that separates both sides of it.
Respectfully,
Arnie Sherr, President Sherr Enterprises -The Resume Store January 10 "I've Lost Controll of my Family" by Arnie Sherr
“I’ve Lost Control of my Family” How and why parental authority diminishes. By Arnie Sherr
January 10, 2009: Wasn’t it great while our kids were young and we as parents were able to impose our will on just about everything they wanted to do or say; effectively direct their every move? “Don’t touch that; it’s dirty – Careful; HOT, you’ll burn your hand – Stop crying right now or I’ll give you something to cry about – take out the trash – do your homework – clean your room – you will be home right after school – you’re not going out with anyone until I meet him.” Remember how good having that power felt? How about this as they got older: “Son or daughter, if you do it that way it will not work; this is the way to do that – yadayadayada, or I want you to do it this way – listen to me, I’ve been there done that!” Wow, and what amazes me is back then most times they listened and of not we told them in a stern manner, “as long as you live under my roof you’ll do as I say, like it or not.” Who said the President of the United States was the most powerful person in the world? In the “family world” for a few growing years’ parents too, are that powerful!
You see, in all families and while the kids are young and impressionable parents have currency with which to wield power. The “as long as you live in my house” is currency; “no TV for a week’ is currency; “your grounded” is currency; however it isn’t long before your kids are too young to be on their own but too old for parents to have anything they can use as currency. Perhaps the only thing left when kids are licensed to drive but don’t have their own cars is “if you want to use my car this weekend you’ll do as I ASK? Observe the ambiguity of the use of the word “ASK?” When they were younger we said “do as I SAY”; it was an order, but now because they are older we replace SAY with ASK. Sounds softer, but it really means the same. Do it or no use of the family car.
Wait though, the landscape soon takes on a new venue; they have jobs, their own apartments, and want to make their own decisions – right or wrong. Whether their kids are married or single, parents have difficulty butting out. It’s not because they want to interfere, it’s because they “know better.” Do they? Perhaps yes and perhaps no; moreover, knowing better is really a cop-out. The truth is it’s hard to relinquish control. They even tell their kids “I want to protect you from making the same mistakes I made.” Why can’t they learn from us, parents ask themselves? Why are they so stubborn and belligerent? After all, we’re only trying to help!
Let me ask parents this; who are you trying to help? I really think parents who continually try to “help” their kids are really trying to help themselves; their need to hold on to the controls, the power they think or wish they still have. Here is a basic fact of life; power is only relevant when it has a relationship with currency. When North Korea refused to stop refining plutonium for their nuclear ambitions the global community enforced “sanctions” against then. Sanctions used in this manner are “currency.” If you don’t listen, I’ll “remove your PC” from your room for one month; also a “sanction.”
The only reason employees fear being fired for wrong doings is because they will have forfeited currency; their paychecks. Bosses can and do tell employees what and how to do thing because their pay is the “currency” at risk. Spouses have, on occasion used certain personal wants and needs as currency. It is wise not to embarrass or try too hard to prevail in an argument with one’s spouse; many times the battle is won but later when certain personal wants and needs are desired it is realized the war has been lost. Ah, the power of “currency.”
Blackmail is always based on “currency.’ It doesn’t have to be money, though. Does “I’ll scratch your back if you’ll scratch mine” ring the proverbial bell? Or, if you rat me out I’ll tell your spouse how you flirted with “you know who.” Strong, very strong “currency”! Many times even salespersons use currency to close the sale. “I’ll tell you what Mr. Jones; if you purchase this new computer today, right now - I’ll throw in a two year warrantee at no additional charge.” Here’s another scenario; “What must I do to get you to take this car home today?” I guess the point I am trying to make is, without some form of currency getting others to comply is challenging. Some parents after other forms of currency have been rendered ineffective resort to “guilt.” I am Jewish and nobody knows better how to use guilt that does Jewish Moms. Many times our spouses and kids attempt using guilt. I know of few Dad’s who can play tough love when tears flow from the eyes of their daughters and many times from their wives.
So, when must parents let go; realize that like many animal species, it’s time to cut the ties and give up the power? I trust my kids to do right because I believe I gave them great foundations. My new role is one of support and to make special efforts to ignore their failures (unless asked) but, more importantly to reward (not with currency) their accomplishments with accolades and recognition. To build their self-esteems and encourage independent thinking; after all, what they do and how the live today is directly attributable to their parent’s influence, and the proper use of the “power” their parents held onto for what as an after-look seems like a mere moment in time.
Rather than hold onto anger and dissatisfaction because our once “power” is no more, it is far better all around to reinforce what we’ve taught our kids and to take on a new role; to be supportive and be the valuable allies we will learn how to be. We shall now praise them for the good they do and accomplish. No more fighting; no more power struggles. Let the love which is complicated with power struggles now flourish without it.
It’s time to stop being the coach and help grow the team; grandchildren, if not already here may soon be in training. Hey Mom-moms and Pop-pops, another chance to practice “power” – all is not lost. Amen January 09 "The Last Angry Man" by Arnie Sherr“The Last Angry Man” Are we hiding in solitude; certainly there are no group outcries! By Arnie Sherr
January 9, 2009: In 1956 Rosetta Books published a novel written prolifically by Gerald Green and known famously as The Last Angry Man. I’ve not read his book but I do remember, as if yesterday, the movie produced in 1959 about a doctor, Sam Abelman, – inspired by his father Dr. Samuel Greenberg.
Gerald Green was born in Brooklyn in 1922, where his father Dr. Samuel Greenberg practiced medicine. Green took an undergraduate degree from Columbia University, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, served in World War II and returned to Columbia for an M.S. in Journalism. He edited news copy for the International News Service before becoming one of the first news writers at the NBC television network. Joining the staff of the Today show, when Dave Garroway was its host, Green became involved in all facets of the, as writer, producer and director.
In 1950, Green published his first novel, His Majesty O'Keefe, co-written with Lawrence Klingman. He established himself as a major novelist in 1956 with the publication of The Last Angry Man, a passionate novel that reflects his experience in television and his love for his father, who died in 1952; Green wrote both the 1959 film adaptation and its 1974 television remake. He is also the author of The Sword and the Sun and The Hostage Heart. His long-running involvement in film and television resulted in his Emmy Award-winning teleplay for Holocaust, which adapted as a novel and scripts for Fatal Judgment, Wallenberg: A Hero's Story and Kent State. Gerald Green continues to write and produce television and feature films.
Dr. Sam Abelman is tough and irascible, but he is dedicated healer and a good man guided by a belief in basic human decency -- the right doctor for the poor and disadvantaged who fill the slums and tenements of Brooklyn. His relationship with his patients is sometimes explosive, especially as the world is changing and becoming more dangerous.
The title “The Last Angry Man” became a literary platform for many who wished to make statements of anger; attempts to wake-up an apathetic public at least for their chosen agenda.
Lawyer Andrew Vachss takes to novels to fight child abuse, another “Angry Man,” if you will, in novels appropriately named Flood from 1985, or Strega; his latest—and his private-eye hero, Burke, throws it right in your face:
“I went into the first door I came to, checked the fat guy sitting at a register by the opening, and saw row after row of sterile-looking aisles ... I made two circuits before I found the back section marked Adults Only. Maybe the boss had a sense of irony—it had nothing but pictures of kids, books about kids, and magazines with kids. Nice stuff—everything from naked kids romping in the sun to a little boy with his hands and legs hog-tied behind him being double sodomized.”
Another “One Angry Man” was Keith Olbermann who on June 23, 2008 mercilessly and feeling justified attacked President Bush:
After having another sensation, unrelated to neurology—a feeling, he later recalled, that was “like being hit by lightning.” Keith Olbermann sat down at his computer and began to write. After an hour, he had the first draft of a lacerating indictment of Bush, a twelve-minute-long (eighteen pages in teleprompter script) j ’accuse, addressed personally to the President.
“Mr. Bush, at long last, has it not dawned on you that the America you have now created includes ‘cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives’?” Olbermann wrote. “They are those in—or formerly in—your employ, who may yet be charged some day with war crimes.”
The denunciation hit the high notes of the most fevered antiwar rhetoric, accusing Bush (he of the “addled brain”), his alleged puppet master (“the American snake-oil salesman Dick Cheney”), and the “tragically know-it-all minions,” “sycophants,” and “mental dwarves” who serve them in the Administration of perpetrating a “panoramic and murderous deceit” on America and the world. Intelligence was faked, WMD’s were imagined, Iraq was laid waste, and American freedoms were trashed.
“Mr. Bush, I hate to break it to you six and a half years after you yoked this nation and your place in history to the wrong war, in the wrong place, against the wrong people, but the war in Iraq is not about you. . . . It is not, Mr. Bush, about your golf game! And, sir, if you have any hopes that next January 20th will not be celebrated as a day of soul-wrenching, heartfelt thanksgiving, because your faithless stewardship of this presidency will have finally come to a merciful end, this last piece of advice . . . when somebody asks you, sir, about your gallant, noble, self-abnegating sacrifice of your golf game so as to soothe the families of the war dead. This advice, Mr. Bush: Shut the hell up!” more…
Moreover, there are many “Angry Men and Women” in America, none being the Last! Yet the only angry outcries I am hearing emanate most loudly from the pundits that over-tell the so-called “Breaking News” as though each American listens individually until they have all been informed. Their redundancy seems to quell America’s anger by simulating active demonstrations and protests as of past years when network TV news shows like CNN and Fox News were not even a premonition for the future. Today, because of their presence America feels needless to rise above and march on the Capitol; boycott companies that demonstrate anti-American practices (I.e., Bank of America issuing credit cards to illegal’s, Exxon/Mobil raping America while earning outrageous profits for the beckoning greediness of their stock holders a the very expense of the American people), and more.
It’s true, “We the People” spoke loudly on November 4th; we overwhelmingly elected Barack Obama and effectively changed the face of the Senate and the House of Representatives and now it seems, America is content to wait and see. A representative landslide set the stage for January 20, 2009 when history shall be served in Washington as Barack Obama’s inauguration will be witnessed globally by the largest audience ever to do so.
But I ask “angrily,” have we spoken loudly enough? Barack Obama has yet to practice his preaching’s and promises; of that we will give him due slack. But what of the House and Senate; how long will “We the People” continue to give them slack? Even now, whilst the President Elect tries to bring both parties together there continues to be resistance. The scars of bi-partisanship run long – run deep! The wounds of divisive attitudes are so engrained in political DNA that it is genetically inherent of Washington’s elected; only a recycling of the old to the new will change its face intricately. While America’s new DNA is corporate deception and fraud; Wall Street greed; gubernatorial treason and ethical breakdown; a ‘cheat-if-you-can-get-away-with-it’ ideology; lack-luster government oversight; trade policies that have and continue to denigrate the very fibre of America’s manufacturing base and economic stability; a financial industry that feels no allegiance to a Nation who’s people supported their growth and profit goals only to act against the welfare of those who ultimately gave them global status, “We the People” raise not so much as a decibel above normal to tell the House and the Senate – “Shape up or ship out.”
The following link will provide the mailing addresses, phone and fax numbers for every Congressperson and Senator with the exception of those sworn in today. I urge all who read this angry message to act in-kind by writing to as many, if not all who sit within each house. God bless America.
Click here or copy and paste to your browser: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml January 08 “Made in America” by Arnie Sherr“Made in America” Remember the American Indian whose single tear represented litter in America? Whose tears are now being shed because so little is “Made in America”? By Arnie Sherr
January 8, 2009: If you are a baby boomer you do indeed remember the American Indian who shed a single tear of sorrow because of those who thought so little of America as to blatantly toss garbage and trash in the streets, fields, and parks of this great and proud land. If you are too young to recall that famous public service TV reference to protecting America’s beauty then I’m sorry to tell you, those who shed tears now are the used-to-be workers once called “lint heads” in the Carolinas, the auto workers once secure in their higher than average paying jobs now laid off and those remaining are working with uncertain futures, the U.S. cutters and garment workers that brought to life the great fashion designs from American designers, the steel workers that once contributed huge income tax revenues and a strong economy to Western Pennsylvania communities like Pittsburgh, and the many support industries that have fallen by the wayside; industries like packaging companies, box makers, screen printers who printed designs on a myriad of “Made in America” products like coffee cups, designer clothes, pens and pencils, and so much more; the button makers whose greatest customers was the clothing “Made here in America,” the spinners that spun thread used to make the clothes, towels, sheets, and so much more that was once “Made in America”, the auto parts manufacturers now facing extinction if the big three do not make it, the housewares that fill our kitchen cabinets, sit on our stove tops, brew our coffee, boil our water, and so much more that was also “once upon a time in America” made right here.
Hey y’all, in the Late 60’s I was working in the toy industry when and wherein imports were a mainstay in rack toy and peg item merchandising. My word, “whodaknownit” that outsourcing began so very long ago. Almost 100% of these type toys were imported from the then Crown Colony of Hong Kong and of course, the child-sweat shops of China. Little by little, more and more toys were being out-sourced. So much for America’s sovereignty; its deterioration had begun to spread its manufacturing pandemic without looking back. Certainly political wheels were asleep then; but of recent times while the evidence of America’s deteriorating sovereignty was apparent even to those blind in both houses they were simply busy kissing the “green filled” wallets tucked neatly in the ass pockets of the “bribacious” and oh so selfishly generous “specials interest groupies.”
I’ve not research this, but so many times guests of supposed economic expertise speaking publically on news networks have attested that nations who give-up or loose their manufacturing base are soon the lose it all. But I ask you seriously, were those to whom we entrusted with our prosperity asleep at the wheel so many years ago? How long has this nap been persisting? Factually, there is no Ambien needed to deafen the ears and interests of those Cashocrats that work not for that which should be “Made in America” for Americans, but for that which is bulging their wallets and purses with bribes from so-called Interests that are indeed, to them Special.
Barack Obama while campaigning promised to change the way things are done in Washington; yet, after building a stimulus plan that deliberately benefits both ideologies, Senators the likes of John Kerry rise in objection of tax cuts for Americans thereby demonstrating more partisan political rhetoric. John Kerry and I am sure other Dems will with him fight these reachings-out without regard to the greater picture.
America and Americans are spinning with dizziness; no jobs, no money, laid-off, lost retirements, forfeited college dreams, losing homes, repossessed cars, begging for free healthcare in crowded emergency rooms, sleeping in parks and streets – on steam grids in the colder cities, waiting in food lines for a meal, asking strangers for hand-outs, no address – no welfare, no address – no social security, and more.
What the f_ _ _ is wrong with the idiots, 30+ percent of whom have some degree of criminal histories, that take up space in the Congress and Senate? Can you not feel he pain of America? Can you not see despair in the eyes of hurting Americans? Moreover, do you not feel the “tears of Americans” dripping on the content of your belligerence? John Kerry and whoever feels so inclined to agree with you, get your heads out of your posteriors; it’s time to give – if you don’t they’ll be nothing good for America and Americans to get! In Jewish Law a get or ghet is a divorce document, which is presented by a husband to his wife to effect their divorce. The essential text of the get is quite short: "You are hereby permitted to all men," i.e., the wife is no longer a married woman, and the laws of adultery no longer apply. The ghet also returns to the wife the legal rights which a husband holds in regard to his wife in a Jewish marriage. Ladies and gentlemen of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. Congress, give America a “ghet” from Free Trade; bring back our sovereignty; restore our pride in manufacturing that which once again shall be labeled “Made in America.” Let it be known that our goods do not kill babies with lead, chemicals in toothpaste and in baby formula. Let it be known to those counties around the globe, you are free to entertain and woo others for ours is no longer a marriage. America herein and now gives you willingly your freedom. No one anywhere in the world makes goods of greater quality and value than that which is “Made in America.” Amen
January 03 “Global demonstrations against Israel” by Arnie Sherr“Global demonstrations against Israel” Please, don’t tell me Anti-Semitism is not alive and well
By Arnie Sherr
Rocket attacks on Israel - Breakdown by year: (Mortar attacks not included)
Above chart is a record of the numbers of rocket fired into Israel since January 2001; the first ever was fired on April 16, 2001. The first mortar to hit Israel was on January 14, 2001 Statistics of Kassam rocket and mortar fire from the Gaza Strip Total rocket attacks: Since the first rocket fell on Israel on 16 April 2001: 3,706 Mortar bomb hits since April 2001: 3,948 Wednesday December 24, 2008 Israeli military officials said Hamas militants fired more than 65 rockets into southern Israel on Wednesday -- four days after a cease-fire officially ended. The count since has not as yet been tabulated; however, persistent TV reports indicate Hamas has not slowed its attacks but rather, they have been intensified. Israel once again is forced to express its pain and frustration over years of incessant rocket and mortar attacks emanating at the hands of Hamas. Because Hamas is centered in Gaza, Palestine’s most population intensive (1.5 million) area, which is not larger than 139 square miles, many Palestinian civilians are being killed and injured. Although Israel’s targets are Hamas locations their bombs inadvertently destroy civilian residences and facilities. Unfortunately, these are the regrets of war and the Israelis have made repeated statements expressing their dismay that civilians are being killed and injured. Without recapping what the news has been reporting of late, I write this essay simply because since 2001 not a living soul has demonstrated anywhere on the earth about the hundreds of Israelis who’ve met their deaths at the hands of, first Hezbollah and now Hamas’, for the past eight years of continuous and deadly suicide bombings, mortar, and rocket attacks. Where, since April 16, 2001 have the protesters been hiding? Or perhaps, when it come to the defense of Jews they remain silent as did the majority of the earth’s populous while six million Jews were gassed to death at Auschwitz, Heiligenbeil, Vaivara, Sisak, Kooga, Keisewald extermination camps, and others during the Holocaust? Does this world’s bias still ring the proverbial bell? As I listen to and observe world reactions, I am amiss to understand how easily the world comes to the aid of all except Israel. The United States, as always, stands firmly behind Israel’s right, not only to exist, but to defend itself against what amounts to “terrorism”; relentless mortar and rocket attacks aimed blindly into Israeli civilian neighborhoods. Yet when Israel, after exercising admirable restraint wages war against those openly responsible for years of death and destruction to Israelis and their neighborhoods retaliates, the world falls in support of “terrorists,” Hamas. Certainly, it is known that the majorities of Palestinian people are not terrorists, nor do most support terrorism. Their unfortunate geographical relationship to Hamas targets makes it virtually impossible for Israel to respond without causing civilian casualties. Perhaps the question to ask is, “how much regard did Hezbollah and now Hamas give to the lives and well-being of those innocent Israeli civilians who have been killed and injured since April 16, 2006?” Consider also, since 2001 Hamas has acquired rockets that are now capable of traveling as much as 30 miles hitting targets never before reached by older rockets. Because of this added threat it has become even more urgent that Israel retaliate and do so without looking back. To those who demonstrate out of Anti-Semitism I have little to say, but for those who demonstrate out of ignorance or misguided compassion I urge that you open the history books and study that which has been going on for more than forty years. At this point trying to lay blame is like answering the question, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” There needs to be lasting peace; most feel that with Hamas such a peace shall never be achieved. Hamas’ presence in government is up to the Palestinian people. From the U.S. and Israeli points of view, Hamas is a terrorist organization; Hamas sympathizers describe it as a political and social government entity. I know of few “government” entities that propel rockets and mortars into the civilian neighborhoods of bordering nations. So, when you consider for whom to demonstrate take a little time to research the history behind. Are Israeli attacks excessive? Well, that depends on how you understand their reasoning. So far this Israeli aggression has lasted 5 days; both Hezbollah and Hamas’ mortar and rocket attacks have been escalating since April 16, 2001, approximately eight plus years. How much anger would you be so motivated to vent?
December 29 “A War of Perception” by Arnie Sherr“A War of Perception” By Arnie Sherr
Does anyone remember the movie, “The War of the Roses”? Or as the Sinatra lyric intimates “Why can’t that ant climb that rubber tree plant?” It is “two immoveable objects” unwilling to listen; listen hell, it’s as if they are both mute.
Barack Obama ran on and was heavily criticized for declaring he will “talk to the enemy,” so to say. And now we are witness to another instance of stubborn defiance; a two sided brick wall never to be penetrated. When will humans open lines of communication? Don’t misunderstand; I am a Jew whose allegiance is 110% behind Israel and because it is so I am concerned that historical repetitions have in the past, not a solution produced. When I say historical, I mean thousands of years of misguided perceptions permeated by muted assumptions.
If you have seen the Michael Douglas flick “War of the Roses” then you can see parity with the “All out War” that is presently Israel’s declared military status and like the movie is escalating beyond onlooker appreciations. By the way, both Mr. and Mrs. Rose perish at each others hand at this movies conclusion. In reality and after listening to representatives of both sides, each declares of themselves pure of sin and any wrong doing. Well, as Momma said more than once, “it takes two to tango.”
Unless, as Barack professes for himself, Israel and Hamas create a dialog there shall never be ‘rocket-free peace’ in Israel and for the Palestinians no prosperity, human dignity, and the absence of repeated destructions at the willful might of the Israelis.
Muslim sympathizers tell that Hamas is a political organization while those who oppose say they are a terrorist group. What say we of those we dislike; the next door neighbor or the loud disturbing jerk living beneath us in an apartment building. How many times have we after arguing through walls, banging broom handles on ceilings come to know and like the once enemies beside and below after, for whatever reason, we have become ‘good’ friends?
I am sure there are Jews that will call me names for even suggesting the two sit down and speak; get to know each other. It’s funny how perceptions may taint mutual objectives. Whatever the innate differences that separate these two ideological factions, dialog may just bridge and repair misconceptions at least to a point where mutually satisfactory solutions may evolve over time. I wish for this, simply because history defies any hope that present courses will ever result in peace for either side. I wish for my Hebrew brothers and sisters peace and solitude once and again with God’s knowledge that against prophecies; Palestinians and Israelis will forever live together in peace and prosperity.
“May God keep us and protect us all. May He find calm and solitude for all of His children by whatever name of which He is prayed?” There is but one God and of him we all his children”
" יכול אחזקה של אלוהים אותנו ולהגן על עלינו כל. " יש אבל אלוהים אחד ושלו כולנו ילדים שלו " Amen
“My suggestions for Change” by Arnie SherrRep. Chris Van Hollen, DCCC Chairman today, December 29, 2008 sent an e-mail requesting suggestions for change from those who supported and continue to support President Elect Barack Obama.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, you are asking for my ideas of change, so I will take this opportunity to answer that very question.
As a congressional representative, I am sure what I am about to suggest will not sit well with you or for that matter with any other representatives or senators already serving in either of those capacities. But, here it is anyway.
In order to curtail future special interest life-long attachments and pervasive influences there needs to be an amendment to the constitution that limits terms in both houses to two. In addition, all elected offices; local, state, and federal must require the same background checks and hiring criteria that is utilized by private industry. Also, members shall not be privy to any sort of retirement benefits for having served one or two terms nor shall they be entitled to health benefits for the remainders of the lives unless they remain in gov’t in some other accepted capacities.
Furthermore, as in private industry all elected at all levels of public service; local, state, and federal who are adjudicated guilty of any felonious act, professionally or civilly shall be terminated post haste and while under investigation shall be suspended until a final judgment is rendered.
I firmly adhere to the belief that our present challenges began more than 50 years ago and maybe even further back, so playin’ the blame game must stop right now. By limiting terms to two, long engrained divisiveness shall cease. Every person elected to public office at all levels should exemplify the highest standards of morals and ethics. Those who fail these tests will not be re-elected to a second term at the will of “We the People.
Since the route cause of today’s dilemma originates from whence we care not to reflect, it is imperative that the current environment be altered to lessen any possibility that special interests can in any way get firm grips on those we trust to work first for “We the People, not the self-serving interests of domestic and global corporate initiatives.
Representative Hollen, if you are really a dedicated servant of “We the People” you will get behind this, the most important of changes because if things stay as they are, no amount of change exclusive of this will exude meaningful results.
Thank you for asking! Non-compete Agreements; are they constitutional? by Arnie SherrDecember 26, 2008 To all Democratic Senators via their Washington, DC office fax numbers Re: Non-compete employee agreements Dear United States Democratic Senators: Being in the resume writing and employment counseling business you can imagine how my business is picking-up. In lieu of this expected result from the growing numbers of unemployed I am hearing from new clients how their search for new employment in their trained career occupations, which are their greatest avenues for replacing their recently lost level of incomes, is impaired by non-compete agreements that they were "required" to sign when hired by their now most recent past employers. Never having been a proponent of "non-compete" contracts, which by the way are in many cases required of employees hired and given no choice but to sign, are now impeding unemployed Americans from applying to job vacancies in their trained vocations. The Supreme Court has ruled that past employees whose work history is suspect of impropriety but not proved as such, may not be given bad references because doing so without due process does in-fact interfere with one of our basic Human Rights; the "right to work." ! believe this very same right is being abused with "non-compete" agreements. Certainly if an employee is exposed to 'trade secrets' requiring and enforcing non-competes has a legitimate place; however, those for whom I am counseling do not have access to "trade secrets" or any other "sensitive information or data." Many of these clients are in sales and because they are suspected of a propensity to take accounts with them should they access employment with a competitor they are coerced into signing "non-oompetes." Certainly if a company properly services their customers losing them to a departing sales person whose new employment status is with a competitor may not be as easy as it would seem. On the other hand, if service is deficient taking them away is not the fault of their departed sales rep; as for rendering poor service they deserve to lose such accounts. But aside from the above, America is in the worst economic status in years and unemployment is setting records. These frivolous non-compete agreements, forced on new employees to ratify as a condition of employment impedes what in America is a basic and protected Human Right; "the Right to Work." Senators, I urge you to re-look at the permissions given to employers with respect to "non-compete agreements" as they are preventing American citizens from gainful employment in their careers of choice; an unjustified deterrent in what are devastating times for many Americans. in the past, and thanking you for your interest and response to this important issue, I remain
ARNOLD SHERR December 28 Office Live Mail“Miffed” By Arnie Sherr For as long as I can remember Palestinians have been launching rockets into a multitude of residential neighborhoods throughout Israel. Although Israel has many times employed as much restraint as possible – most times at the insistence of their allies – history has demonstrated consistently the same harsh criticisms for lesser intense responses than when Israel reacts strongly. In addition to rocket attacks, suicide bombings have for many years dominated US and global news reports. I think if one takes a moment to reflect on the persistent destructive activities emanating from Palestine it must be obvious that when Israel retaliates with measured responses they have never produced any kind of rational reaction on the parts of the late Yasser Arafat or the present Palestinian leadership, Hamas. Surely Palestinian rockets result is less loss of life and injury than do Israel’s bomb-and-tank counter measures, especially counter measures that are of the nature of those being expedited now. Perhaps, thinking of the hundreds or even thousands of rocket attacks as being stabbed with a quarter-inch needle relentlessly for weeks, even months may illustrate Israel’s frustration and anger. From time to time it may be necessary to slap the stabber in an effort to stop the persistent stabbing; however, at some point the stabbed may have to express their distaste for these continuously destructive activities by deliberately over-reacting simply to send a profound message. Right now, at this very moment Israel is making such a profound statement to Hamas. Why then is the world blind to Hamas’ relentless attacks on Israel’s civilian populations? Why do we not hear the Saudi’s speak against Hamas’ rocket attacks? Why do we not hear objection for Hamas’ rocket attacks from the International Community? Why then, when Israel reacts strongly does the world suddenly come out of its coma? It nauseates me when I hear the pundits report these superficial and propagandized declarations against Israel when the fault lays on those who are behind the rocket attacks on Israel’s civilian populations. Not only is Hamas an enemy of Israel, it is also the enemy of the Palestinians. Their historical bigotries hold back the Palestinian people from a prosperity of which only Israel could bring. They keep their people blind to the truths that an Israeli/Palestinian relationship could offer by filling them with propaganda and hatred. The reality is that peace between the Palestinians and Israel is within reach; were it not for leaders like Yasser Arafat and now, Hamas who makes it a matter of policy to hold their people back. Their fear; if the Palestinian people become too prosperous they will lose the power they hold over them. Moreover, “peace between Israel and Palestine is so close; and yet, so very far away.” December 20 Can Techs transition into Sales? by Arnie SherrSherrEnterprises Cover Letters, Resumes and a whole lot more… Mastering the Customer Service Puzzle Creative Literary Applications
Can Techs transition into Sales? Why understanding invention, inception, conception, and adaptation addresses end user reeds. Arnie Sherr, Sherr Enterprises December 20, 2008
The most heralded sales experts and teachers overwhelmingly agree; needs based selling has proved to be the most results oriented. Whether selling simple product applications or those considered intricate, selling nuts and bolts generally removes presentations away from that which in the end closes the sale; addressing and solving end user needs. It is neither the why nor the how, but the result that ultimately earns the handshake. Whereas price is concerned; well, that is directly attributable to the messenger’s ability to establish value through presentation.
The Dalai Lama once said, “Simplicity is the key to happiness in the modern world.” The expressions "Keep it simple, stupid (KISS)," "Kill your darlings," and "Less is more" all pinpoint the fact that simplicity is important. Simplicity lasts. Simplicity is necessary in order to properly convey any idea.
It is generally accepted that sales people and technical people speak different languages. Adhering to the KISS principle, explaining nuts and bolts is counterproductive; however, when “salespersons” have strong knowledge and understanding of invention, inception, conception, and adaptation, generating sizzle is more supportive. Sizzle is the aroma that titillates the senses and grows desire while reducing defenses. Although technical information at some point may be required, introducing such data when selling will most assuredly douse sizzle. “If my steak tastes best, knowing how and by whom it was cooked is irrelevant.” What matters is that my needs and expectations have been more than satisfactorily met. Furthermore, the costs of solving my needs are secondary to any suspicion that competitive products may just not be as aromatic.
It is of general knowledge that sales people and techs view most, if not all things from different prisms. Most times techs who attempt to transition into sales do not succeed simply because they think in terms of nuts and bolts; how it works and why it will do what the end user is seeking to get done. Factually, it is the ‘how and why mindset’ that detours techs from bridging into the sales arena. Having said that, of most rules there are always “exceptions.”
“Transitioning into Sales”
I believe those who excel in sales endear an innate propensity; something in their genes that equips them with the tenacity to endure the challenges inherent with the need for successful closes. If you’ve never actually made a sale, small or large, you cannot understand the endorphin rush produced there from. Commissions, compensation, and even accolades are nice, but the immediate gratification is one that is extremely personal and difficult to phrase; that is, unless you’ve experienced it for yourself.
I’ve heard from many, “technical people cannot sell anything” and most times I am in agreement. On the other hand, as I stated above there have and will continue to be exceptions. From time-to-time tech employees do successfully transition into sales. And again, I believe it is because as much as they speak tech-ease, they have the ability to cook up a really great tasting steak; one with an aroma that envelopes the senses, reduces resistance, and produces lines at restaurant doors daily. To be more definitive; they are actors, story tellers, challenge solvers, and are naturally addicted to and strive for the famous but seldom mentioned “sales-high.”
Do those who transition from technical originations bring with them valuables others may not have to draw on? Yes! · They know personally the quality of that which they sell. · They understand personally the dedication of those who invest of themselves in that which they sell · They believe wholly and from the inside in and of that which they sell
And, because of the above their stores (scripts) will allay these passions in more intense forms of sizzle.
The greatest of history’s sales mentors have always dictated; own what you sell. Well, of many things that’s doable; but of more complicated products, systems, and intangibles physical ownership may not be possible. Mentally, however, ownership can be manifested in other ways. “I actually designed this system; I actually worked on its assembly line; I started with this company in the mail room; I began here as part-time while attending high school.” By golly, any of these and of others I’ve not mentioned ownership may have many originations. Whatever they are they add passion, belief, and believability to the seller’s story (script).
In the natural scheme of things believing in what you sell is primary, but loving what you do shall certainly result if you solve needs, think, innovate, create, blend, be a team-player, mentor others, teach, and most importantly, produce. Rest assured your rise to the 20% that produce 80% (The Paretto Principle) will only happen if you sincerely like people.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Send a private message
Tell a friend
Add to My MSN
Add to your network
Sign up for alerts
|
|
